Posted
by
timothy
on Sunday February 10, 2013 @05:59PM
from the i-watch-sounds-hinky dept.

The WSJ reports that Apple is "experimenting with designs for a watch-like device that would perform some functions of a smartphone, according to people briefed on the effort." An excerpt: The company has discussed such a device with its major manufacturing partner Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., one of these people said, as part of explorations of potentially large product categories beyond the smartphone and tablet. Apple's efforts come as companies have introduced various kinds of wearable gadgets, mainly designed to measure physical activity. More sophisticated devices face big technical challenges, but also are attracting investments from large technology companies. Foxconn, as Hon Hai is also known, has been working on a spate of technologies that could be used in wearable devices, one of these people said. In particular, the Taiwan-based company has been working to address the challenges of making displays more power-efficient and working with chip manufacturers to strip down their products."

I've only had my Pebble for a few days, but I'm finding it pretty convenient when I'm out and about. A lot quicker when I'm walking somewhere, or on the subway, to glance at my wrist to see if I need to respond to an email right away or if it can wait. And the (currently) rudimentary music controls are convenient, too.
It's still in a primitive state, but hopefully the developer community will come up with some killer apps for it. Time will tell if it becomes useful enough to survive past the toy stage and become a regular fixture on my arm.

I've only had my Pebble for a few days, but I'm finding it pretty convenient when I'm out and about. A lot quicker when I'm walking somewhere, or on the subway, to glance at my wrist to see if I need to respond to an email right away or if it can wait. And the (currently) rudimentary music controls are convenient, too.

It's still in a primitive state, but hopefully the developer community will come up with some killer apps for it. Time will tell if it becomes useful enough to survive past the toy stage and become a regular fixture on my arm.

'Need to respond to an email right away'? Email is an inherently laggy and unreliable messaging system...

I've only had my Pebble for a few days, but I'm finding it pretty convenient when I'm out and about. A lot quicker when I'm walking somewhere, or on the subway, to glance at my wrist to see if I need to respond to an email right away or if it can wait. And the (currently) rudimentary music controls are convenient, too.

It's still in a primitive state, but hopefully the developer community will come up with some killer apps for it. Time will tell if it becomes useful enough to survive past the toy stage and become a regular fixture on my arm.

'Need to respond to an email right away'? Email is an inherently laggy and unreliable messaging system...

Maybe you need a new email provider. With both Gmail and my company's Exchange system, emails show up on my mobile device within 10 seconds or so at least 99% of the time. I can't even remember the last time I lost an email I was expecting - sometimes emails get trapped in a spam filter, but almost never with someone I correpspond regularly (like my coworkers).

Availability of the mobile network on my commute is far less reliable than my email services, but even so there are still times when I'd like to retu

That's only guaranteed if the messages don't need to move between servers. If they do, then there's the theoretical 5 days or so that the servers are supposed to keep trying to find a route before giving up. One of the downsides to the decentralized nature of the net is that sometimes things just get lost.

yes, but it most notably lacks bluetooth support, Sure, you can get a dongle, but that starts to get clunky in a watch situation.
Oh, and all of the phone bits too. And apps. Those would be very interesting to see in one that size...

Metrosexual man, the single young man with a high disposable income, living or working in the city (because thatâ(TM)s where all the best shops are), is perhaps the most promising consumer market of the decade. In the Eighties he was only to be found inside fashion magazines such as GQ, in television advertisements for Levi's jeans or in gay bars. In the Nineties, heâ(TM)s everywhere and heâ(TM)s going shopping.

I stopped wearing a watch outside of work recently, for the same reason. However, no one is allowed to bring cell phones, 2-way pager, cameras, or anything that can transmit or connect to a computer. So I wear a simple Casio watch to work and typically take it off when I get home. I'd love to go to a smart watch like Pebble that can connect to my phone, display alerts, play music, etc however I couldn't wear it to work.

I stopped wearing a watch outside of work recently, for the same reason. However, no one is allowed to bring cell phones, 2-way pager, cameras, or anything that can transmit or connect to a computer. So I wear a simple Casio watch to work and typically take it off when I get home. I'd love to go to a smart watch like Pebble that can connect to my phone, display alerts, play music, etc however I couldn't wear it to work.

Unprofessional only in the same way that white, unembossed business cards are unprofessional. Would you say an executive who wore a cheap Casio also looked unprofessional compared to the exec next to him/her with a gold-plated arm ornament?

Professionalism is in the eye of the beholder, and when I see an expensive watch I think "more money than sense". One can argue about how many smartphones are overpriced toys, but at least they do something more than tell the damn time.

Professionalism is in the eye of the beholder, and when I see an expensive watch I think "more money than sense".

You're only hurting yourself by jumping to such conclusions. There is no way that you can accurately estimate the price of the watch you see on someone's arm. More often than not, expensive-looking watches are anything but.

You are missing the point. My mechanical watch tells me exactly what time it is and it allows me to pick on everybody else at my meetings for being late and I don't care what time their phones say it is. Meetings start according to my watch...

I enjoy long walks - for exercise and stress release. I don't want to be in communication with anyone, but I do want to know roughly how far I have walked and when I should be heading back in, and for this, a watch is perfect.

I still don't own a mobile phone since I am disabled with speech and hearing impediments and can't hold things. However, I do wear and use a Casio calculator watch. It would be nice to have a small and light watch that is like a smartphone.

For many years I didn't wear a watch, but I do now. It is rude to look at your phone while meeting with someone and it kinda gives away that you're wishing you were somewhere else. It is much easier to surreptitiously glance at your watch. This is the only reason I wear one.

I'm middle age and I consider it rude to pull out your phone while we are in a meeting (even just lunch); but if you are 20's and 30's age, its COMMON to see people checking their phones every 15 mins or so. people will sit at tables and stare at their phones and poke at it, even when there's another person in their party across from them.

more and more, the younger generation's ways will be commonplace and accepted.

I'm used to wearing a watch. It's easier than fishing the phone out of my pocket, but I don't have any of the good reasons others have given, I'm just used to being able to see the time easily.

It isn't a matter of fashion, it's a slightly ugly Casio because I like gadgets and this is waterproof, has a compass and thermometer. But even without the gadgets I'd still expect to see the time and date just by looking at my wrist.

I stopped wearing a watch years ago because I could pull my phone (not even a smart one) out of my pocket to see what time it was.

Same here - watches always irritated my skin (even hypoallergenic ones), and once I carried a phone always that just made more sense to tell time with. A watch was excess that you had to be careful not to damage.

I can see watches making a retro comeback of some kind, but I can't see any electronic watch being a mass-market item in the way they used to be.

Years ago, I purchased an expensive watch. WHY? Because I discouvered that over the years I had spent that much on a series of CHEAP watches that I would eventually break, or they would simply give up working.

In 1990, I paid $1500 for a nice watch. It still works today, 23 years later, and I expect I will own it until I die.

The closest Apple has come to a watch is the iPod Nano (6th gen) which had a whole host of problems, namely that the screen (and therefore the interface) was tiny. Assuming the Nano 6th gen as a template in size, what functions of my smartphone could that easily replace? Music playback would work, but not videos, nor would web or messaging work all that well. I suppose a game or two might not be too bad. But other than that I'm at a loss as to what it could have that my smartphone has. Streaming music perhaps? But really, the screen is going to be too tiny to be usable.

The concept seems pretty useless to me, given that your cellphone is almost equally as accessible nowadays. Maybe they are letting out these rumors to force their competition to re-focus their R&D in something useless and make them waste money ant time? The idea of the Apple TV screen kind of rings of the same.

The biggest difference is that I've heard of this non-existent iWatch but I've never heard of Sony's watch. Thanks for the link, though, I'd actually like to check on of those out, just out of curiosity.

Considering Apple's lack of success with handling alarms, new years, and DST switches, would anyone really want a watch from Apple?

The alternate point of view would be: now that Apple has been bitten by those bugs and (one hopes) fixed them, that means Apple can re-use the now-correct code in its new products rather than having to write (and then debug) new code.

It's sort of like getting measles; if you came down with it once, you won't get it again because you're inoculated. Assuming Apple is smart enough to make its date/time algorithms reusable, of course.

The smart phone has retreated from shrinking for good reason - all things, no matter how advanced, reach a limit to their usefulness as input and display devices.

Ideally, a watch-like "smart phone" would be better as a peripheral, ala the Pebble [getpebble.com], acting with a smart phone for additional freedom (and to replace an actual watch with something more flexible in function).

I can see a future where people throw their hand up to the side of their face with a "phone handset" gesture, speaking into their pinky, liste

The other sites talk about Apple also pursuing a device with curved glass. I have to wonder if they've taken a page from the CST-01 [kickstarter.com] design validation unit on KickStarter. Could they be pursuing an iDevice in the wrist bracer form factor? I'm looking at the pictures and I'm telling myself that Apple has got to be exploring some sort of electronic device in this form. If so, it is going to be significantly more complex than a watch.

My take on the summary is - Apple has a dream gadget in mind, they're talking to Foxconn, and Foxconn is doing the engineering. I'm scratching my head for a second here. Does Apple not do it's own engineering anymore? Have they outsourced EVERYTHING except marketing? WTF?

Foxconn and Hon Hai are manufacturers (like the summary says). Apple (and other tech companies) work with them the same way you'd work with, say, a metal foundry somewhere to have them manufacture some parts you've designed. The main reason for this is you can't just invent something (especially technology), and just ask people to build it for you, they need to be able to.

So, this wrist-contoured glass. It sounds like Foxconn has been working on a new process for this, and have been looking for a way to get customers to pay them to build stuff for them using it. In this case, working with Apple to work it into a new watch.

The engineering for the watch itself will be all Apple. The engineering behind how to manufacture it will be a collaboration between Apple and Foxconn (or whoever), the same way Apple (and everyone else) has always done it. This is similar to how the processes for manufacturing the unibody aluminum enclosures and the iPhone 5 parts matching system was developed.

What you're thinking is a private label system, with some companies engage in (not Apple), where you might see the exact same product that gets labeled with different brands from different companies, similar to how some store brands (especially food and household supplies) are done.

Because everything Apple does is super important! Even a rumor about them possibly thinking about making a gadget that 100 other companies are also working on is important enough to get an immediate front page on Slashdot.

Not to mention that dozens of these are already on the market, some specific to the Android world, some rather generic.Sony has bluetooth Smartwatches and LiveView watchs that let you check email, messages, etc without taking the phone out of your pocket.These are peripherals for your phone.

There are also full phones [amazon.com] that actually seems to get good reviews. Some of these are actually fairly inexpensive [amazon.com].

But, hey, if Apple makes it and charges $596, they will sell millions because it will be the best thing ever.

And plenty of people on/. will remind us frequently that they didn't invent it, but somehow leave out the detail that all of the existing devices shifted to the Apple form factor and user interface shortly after the Apple release.

I'm not so sure. The Apple brand is getting spread pretty darn thin already. It no longer feels special to own Apple gear and their brand was mostly what it's all about for them. The one thing they do really well is marketing though, so maybe they'll be able to milk it for a few more product cycles.

Not to mention that dozens of these are already on the market, some specific to the Android world, some rather generic.

And notice how no one uses them or even remembers them until Apple makes one.

It's not, like you seem to think, that Apple is some also-ran that is late to the party, but somehow gets all the credit. It's that Apple tends to put in the inordinate effort required to take a product that is simply neat tech and make it great.

That's why people get excited.

"Sony's making a watch that connects to your phone? That's cool. I probably won't get one (or even see on in person, ever), but it's cool."

"Apple's making one? I can hardly wait to see what they come up with!"

Do you get excited when MS comes up with a new online service? Probably not. What about Google? Yeah, me too. Excitement with Apple and hardware works much the same way.

Hi, you must be new here. Slashdot is a moderated site, meaning enough people were interested to mod the initial story up so that it made it as a published story. That also means your somewhat slanted view of what is news and what isn't doesn't mesh completely with all the folks on this site. Welcome to the internet. Not everyone will agree with you, or want the same stories as you would like to see.

I might suggest in the future you simply ignore the post, or mod it down prior to it being published rather than whining about it after the fact, clicking on the link, and posting a response to the story, which in turn makes the post look more valuable in 'clicks' as well as measured by activity.

Funny you should mention rats. This is like the experiment where the rats had to choose between food and cocaine. Any rational person would just ignore this story, but many iHaters will keep pressing the "submit" button for their dose of whining and feeling superior.

So no, you shouldn't care, and (reading these comments) few Apple fans care, but there is a huge pool of people who do care. And who really need to get on with their lives.

So? When Microsoft released the Surface Pro, it did what Microsoft wanted (as limited by technology and budget; I'm sure Microsoft wanted 10 hours of battery life but didn't get it). Same for Samsung, Motorola, etc.

It seems like you are implying that "Apple releases features that Apple wants, not that consumers want." If you're not saying this, then please clarify. If you are saying this, then I think the evidence proves you wrong.

Long Long Ago, there were many MP3 players which all did what their manufactures wanted (and what their manufacturers thought consumers wanted). They sold okay, but then Apple released an MP3 player with fewer features but a different interface and musical ecosystem. Tech folks scoffed (No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.) but after a few iterations, consumers found that they loved Apple's features more than other players' features. You can clearly divide the MP3 market into "before Apple" and "after Apple" portions with a huge feature shift for all successful players at the break. Exact same thing happened with smart phones. Exact same thing happened with tablets. Given Apple's record, there is a good chance this could happen with a theoretical iWatch.

Look, I've got lots of issues with Apple, but arguing that they do not give users what they want is difficult. If you make an argument that contradicts all available data, you must first give an explanation which doesn't involve every consumer except you being a brainless zombie (but only for exactly one product), a nefarious deception performed years ago by forward-thinking Kenyan grandparents, perfect collusion between all climatologists, or some other unlikely conspiracy theory.

One reason that Apple was able to take over the market was because they realized that there is a large number of customers that don't really care if their mobile device is nor a great phone. This seems counter intuitive, but a lot of people predicted that the iPhone would fail because it was a bad phone. History has told the real story. Even with Android Phones I see people buying them because they have a HDMI output, not really because of the quality of phone or ease of use.

A watch is piece of jewlery that happens to markt he time. Very few people buy a watch primarily to know the time. This was even before a phone was a more reliable time keeping device than a watch.

It would be funny if Apple went along with what their critics accuse them of -- selling fashion statements rather than technology -- and just put out a really nice watch that's purely mechanical. I'll admit, if they did it, I might buy one if it was elegant and well made.

I hope they do something other than put out a souped up nano with a strap. If they get real creative and do something unique it might pique my interest, but I'm not holding my breath.